[Christian Perrier]
> What about allowing l10n-only updates? I'm pretty sure some
> maintainers have sleeping bugs in the BTS for such packages. I also
> hope for a few more l10n updates for shadow (which templates appear in
> the installation process).
Anthony Towns wrote in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/01/msg00680.html
] I guess the alternative would be to setup something like:
]
] Day 1: Cleanup freeze begins. No uploads that aren't approved
] by RM team will make it into the next stable. Uploads
] will be approved that fix security bugs, and translations
] for packages that have been last uploaded less than four
] weeks ago. Other uploads that include important fixes may
] be accepted.
] Day 15: Security freeze only. Uploads will only be accepted that
] fix security issues.
] Day 30: Release
]
] This would mean the translation team would have to have someone collating
] translations for packages and NMUing them, and that they'd have to be on
] the ball enough to have already uploaded translations for things that
] haven't changed in the past month, and to finish off everything in a
] couple of weeks. It'd have to be NMUs in at least some cases, because
] a couple of weeks probably isn't enough time to coordinate with all
] maintainers. It'd have to be a couple of weeks, because without britney,
] a separate distribution is just too much of a nuisance to maintain. And
] it'd have to be limited to packages that have recently been uploaded
] to ensure that we don't come across any unknown FTBFS problems due to
] changes in the toolchain.
That sounded quite reasonable, any chance to have such a freeze?
Denis